Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

US Court nullifies FTC requirement for click-to-cancel

arstechnica.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

361–370 of 599 posts

Re: US Court nullifies FTC requirement for click-to-cancel

#361

Post by Forgeties79 »

zaphar wrote: post #350
rtkwe wrote: post #342

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Depends on how accurate you think the >$100 million estimated impact from the lower court is. When the FTC did the analysis they came up with a lower impact so they didn't have to do it. I'd be more willing to believe they got it right than a single judge did.

Why do you think the FTC analysis was more accurate than the opposing sides? The judges, of whom there were multiple, were going off of opposing side argumentation not just their own subjective opinion. That's how courts in the US work.

[flagged]

Re: US Court nullifies FTC requirement for click-to-cancel

#362

Post by barbazoo »

mh- wrote: post #333
julienchastang wrote: post #322

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> "If you actually bother to click through and read the article," HN guidelines ask that you say "The article mentions that".[0] [0] https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html

[flagged]

Two wrongs don't make a right.

Re: US Court nullifies FTC requirement for click-to-cancel

#363

Post by trealira »

Forgeties79 wrote: post #361
zaphar wrote: post #350

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Why do you think the FTC analysis was more accurate than the opposing sides? The judges, of whom there were multiple, were going off of opposing side argumentation not just their own subjective opinion. That's how courts in the US work.

[flagged]

More important than the Heritage Foundation is the Federalist Society in the case of getting more conservative judges.

Re: US Court nullifies FTC requirement for click-to-cancel

#364

Post by Tainnor »

pjmlp wrote: post #140

The consumer protection laws are so bad the other side of Atlantic. Most European countries, have their own version of consumer protection agencies, usually any kind of complaint gets sorted out, even if takes a couple months. If they fail for whatever reason, there is still the top European one. Most of the time I read about FTC, it appears to side with the wrong guys.

It's definitely better in Europe, but certain courts and DPAs (especially the Irish one) are unfortunately known to be incredibly business friendly.

Re: US Court nullifies FTC requirement for click-to-cancel

#365

Post by anticensor »

dudeinjapan wrote: post #278
pjmlp wrote: post #140

The consumer protection laws are so bad the other side of Atlantic. Most European countries, have their own version of consumer protection agencies, usually any kind of complaint gets sorted out, even if takes a couple months. If they fail for whatever reason, there is still the top European one. Most of the time I read about FTC, it appears to side with the wrong guys.

A Civil law (Roman law) system might have upheld the FTC's click-to-cancel rule in spite of missteps because it serves the public good. But in common law, process is king--as is protecting individual rights (including the rights of shady marketers.)

In certain civil law systems such as Turkey, the process is still king, in fact more important than in the US because of the preponderance of positive law in civil law.

Re: US Court nullifies FTC requirement for click-to-cancel

#366

Post by standardUser »

bluGill wrote: post #344
thrance wrote: post #256

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Weird how they only enforce the law when it serves their interests though.

That is false. The conservatives have made it clear that they support the rule, but it needs to be done right. The real question is why are liberals willing to ignore the law?

> The real question is why are liberals willing to ignore the law?

I hope you don't get accidentally deported to a foreign prison by those lofty conservatives who are SO concerned with following the letter of the law.

But yeah, when a far right court digs up a technicality that just happens to serve the corporate interests that line the pockets of those who appointed these judges well... that's the justice you must truly value.

Re: US Court nullifies FTC requirement for click-to-cancel

#367

Post by zaphar »

Forgeties79 wrote: post #361
zaphar wrote: post #350

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Why do you think the FTC analysis was more accurate than the opposing sides? The judges, of whom there were multiple, were going off of opposing side argumentation not just their own subjective opinion. That's how courts in the US work.

[flagged]

Can you point to specific examples where the courts interpretation and reasoning wasn't rooted in the law and the arguments from the lawyers in the court specificall? Because I can't. I might disagree with some of the opinions but I can't point to anything where they were clearly not basing it on the law and the various lawyer's argumentation.

Re: US Court nullifies FTC requirement for click-to-cancel

#368

Post by Forgeties79 »

trealira wrote: post #363
Forgeties79 wrote: post #361

Earlier quoted context omitted.

[flagged]

More important than the Heritage Foundation is the Federalist Society in the case of getting more conservative judges.

Good catch. That whole pipeline is very robust too - I remember mocking the Burke society folks in college, not realizing at all that they were figuring out who was headed to work with federal judges/think tanks for the next generation.

Re: US Court nullifies FTC requirement for click-to-cancel

#369

Post by vkou »

rtkwe wrote: post #342
caesil wrote: post #318

Earlier quoted context omitted.

If you actually bother to click through and read the article, you'd find the court expressed sympathies with the intent of the rule, but the FTC "is required to conduct a preliminary regulatory analysis when a rule has an estimated annual economic effect of $100 million or more", and they did not do that. The blame here belongs to the FTC for its rushed and sloppy process that put the rule on shaky ground legally.

Depends on how accurate you think the >$100 million estimated impact from the lower court is. When the FTC did the analysis they came up with a lower impact so they didn't have to do it. I'd be more willing to believe they got it right than a single judge did.

Why would this have any economic impact? These dark patterns don't generate any net value, they just move money from one pocket to another. The money will be spent somewhere else, instead.

Re: US Court nullifies FTC requirement for click-to-cancel

#370

Post by Forgeties79 »

zaphar wrote: post #367
Forgeties79 wrote: post #361

Earlier quoted context omitted.

[flagged]

Can you point to specific examples where the courts interpretation and reasoning wasn't rooted in the law and the arguments from the lawyers in the court specificall? Because I can't. I might disagree with some of the opinions but I can't point to anything where they were clearly not basing it on the law and the various lawyer's argumentation.

That request is a trap and can’t be satisfied. Any answer can be hand waved away with ease. It’s vague yet restrictive.
Post reply on HN